1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The plaintiff asserted that he/she was appointed as the chairperson of Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Committee for the Management of the Jongno-gu Seoul Apartment Complex on January 1, 2017, posted false information as if he/she was the chairperson's activity expenses at the meeting of resident residents located in the Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on February 22, 2017, and embezzled the common funds of occupants by withdrawing the above money from the management expenses account for each month from around that time without the resident's approval as the chairperson's activity expenses. On January 1, 2018, the plaintiff posted a false public notice that he/she was appointed as D as the auditor of the Management Committee on January 1, 2018, and caused damage to the public notice, and the same month.

7. In December 2017, the Plaintiff posted false facts that “the Plaintiff demanded the Defendants to pay KRW 30 million on an apartment building.” On December 7, 2012 of the same year, the Plaintiff committed an illegal act, such as obscing and assaulting the Plaintiff, searching for the Plaintiff’s house and scambling the Plaintiff’s house, and scambling the scam, etc., and Defendant E,F, and G as an executive officer of the management committee, asserting that the Defendant E, F, and G assisted and assisted the above illegal act, the Plaintiff sought compensation for damages against the Defendants amounting to KRW 29 million.

2. As to embezzlement of the board of directors, it is difficult to view that the damages claim caused by embezzlement of apartment management expenses if Defendant B embezzled apartment management expenses, such as the Plaintiff’s assertion, would result in the damages to the Plaintiff’s individual as a matter of course, and according to each of the evidence No. 14, No. 14, No. 4, and No. 9, Defendant B notified Defendant B of the expenditure of the operating expenses of the existing agency, the increase of the chairman’s activity expenses in lieu thereof, and the effect of reducing the management expenses, etc. upon the result of the resident’s meeting. In the case of the Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Office No. 2018 and No. 34609, the investigative agency may recognize the fact that there was no intention of illegal acquisition on April 25, 2018, and thus, it made a disposition against Defendant B without suspicion.